Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:16:13 -0600 From: Chris Csanady <ccsanady@friley-185-205.res.iastate.edu> To: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov> Cc: justin@apple.com, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Serious mbuf cluster leak.. Message-ID: <19990213001613.93D2E10@friley-185-205.res.iastate.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Feb 1999 12:53:18 PST." <199902122053.MAA04612@lestat.nas.nasa.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:15:29 -0800 > "Justin C. Walker" <justin@apple.com> wrote: > > > I can say that our implementation doesn't seem to = > > suffer from this problem. Could be there's an issue in the use of = > > PRUS_* v. the socket state we use. The code in my kernel looks like: > >The NetBSD code looks pretty much just like this, and also does not >suffer from an mbuf cluster leak of any kind. I'll take a look at the NetBSD code when I have a chance. Are you sure you just have not seen it though? I only see it over gigabit ethernet, and even then only when doing lots of large writes. Perhaps it is a timing issue? I am only pointing out what I see. It does not happen with source from before this change--so what else should I think? You are welcome to take a glance at my driver, although I don't think it is the problem. There are only 2 places where clusters are touched, and they never become seperate from the mbuf header. But I don't see any mbuf leak.. Chris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990213001613.93D2E10>